Team Obama to unions: Bail out our convention, will ya?

posted at 11:21 am on April 25, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

The ongoing scandal in the North Carolina Democratic Party isn’t the only dark cloud on the horizon for the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte this year. Even though the lovefest on the Left has been reduced to three days from the traditional four, the Democrats are still coming up millions of dollars short in the funds necessary to pay for the event. Barack Obama’s campaign has had to go hat in hand to the unions for the cash, thanks to his insistence that corporate money is too dirty:

President Barack Obama’s political advisers are pressing labor unions to contribute to the Democratic convention in September to cover a fundraising shortfall resulting from their self-imposed ban on corporate donations, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Democratic officials gave representatives of the major U.S. unions, including the AFL-CIO, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the United Auto Workers, a tour of the convention sites in Charlotte, North Carolina, April 23 in advance of a request for donations, according to the two people, who requested anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss internal strategy.

The three-day convention will culminate in Obama’s re- nomination in Bank of America Stadium on Sept. 6. So far, the host committee in Charlotte is roughly halfway to its $36.6 million goal.

Four years ago, unions contributed more than $8 million to the Democratic convention in Denver, according to financial disclosure reports.

That may be a tough sale. Obama hasn’t delivered on much for the unions, although Democrats in the Senate did last night. In timing that can only be called curious, Democrats united to keep an NLRB rule in place that allows “ambush elections” to take place:

That rule is scheduled to go into effect Monday. Business groups pleaded with Congress to overturn the rule and will now have to turn to the courts if they want to get their way. They contend employers won’t have enough time to make their case against union representation if elections are held in as little as 10 days after an organizing petition is filed.

Today, however, a resolution overturning the streamlined elections rule got only 45 votes in the Senate, short of the 60 votes needed to clear procedural hurdles. Republicans voted in favor of the resolution; Democrats voted against it.

What a coincidence! Just after Democrats made their sales pitch to the unions to bail out their convention, Democrats in the Senate united to give them a gift rule that will force businesses to hold snap unionization elections, rather than give businesses time to make their case. I’m sure one has nothing to do with the other … right?

Though the president has also proposed some streamlining of existing programs, he wants to expand the job training budget by $2.8 billion. While upgrading our workforce could make sense, the administration may have a secondary purpose – payback for Labor’s $400 million support of his 2008 campaign, and its expected boost to his reelection effort.

Here’s how: the government funds job training programs administered by organized labor. Through such efforts, unions can expand their outreach to the unemployed and disaffected. In the process, they sign up new workers. Meanwhile, Big Labor is offering workers “green” certification through these programs. At the same time, the White House wants to funnel money into “green” industries. It is only a matter of time before such works demand “green” certification, guaranteeing union workers preferred status.

Sound farfetched? Perhaps, but I’m not alone in making the connection. Consider a study undertaken last year by the University of California at Berkeley’s Center on Employment in the Green Economy. It assesses the labor needs of the state’s mammoth sustainability drive. The authors encourage “high road economic development” – code for union labor – and embrace the dual strategies of “high-road agreements and certification strategies.”

Organized labor and environmentalists are joining in this effort. The Blue Green Alliance, a “strategic partnership” founded in 2006 between the Steelworkers and the Sierra Club, claims it has grown into a massive collaboration among our nation’s largest unions and green groups, uniting “more than eight and a half million people in pursuit of good jobs, a clean environment and a green economy.” They combine forces to push environmental spending and workers’ rights.

In one sense, Team Obama and the Democrats have a good case to make for insisting that Big Labor cover the convention costs. They’ve already bought the Democratic Party; why not pay the bill?

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

What sweeteners are the DNC offering Big Labor/Big Environment? Forced nationalizatiion of the Ford Motor Company? A compulsory windmill attached to every car? An organic high speed railway between Washington DC and Boulder, Colorado?

What sweeteners are the DNC offering Big Labor/Big Environment? Forced nationalizatiion of the Ford Motor Company? A compulsory windmill attached to every car? An organic high speed railway between Washington DC and Boulder, Colorado?

Not much . . . except for the hundreds of billions of “stimulus” dollars that went to the states and funded salaries for lots of unionized employees like teachers and police. Not much . . . except the hundreds of billions of federal tax dollars that were used to save union autoworkers’ jobs and gift the unions with a bigger ownership stake in GM and Chrysler. Not much . . . except for all those union “shovel ready” jobs on roads and other infrastructure projects that were also funded by the non-stimulating “stimulus” billions.

Like outlawing abortion, eliminating the NLRB is not something Romney can do by executive fiat, even if he wanted to. He’d first need the legislature to pass a law eliminating the NLRB (or repealing the law which created it), which does not appear likely to happen.

But you’ve reminded me of some of the other things Obama has done for unions (other than directing hundreds of billions of tax dollars into their coffers) — he has appointed (including the illegal non-recess appointment of Cordray) pro-union, anti-business stooges to the NLRB.

Not much . . . except for all those union “shovel ready” jobs on roads and other infrastructure projects that were also funded by the non-stimulating “stimulus” billions.

AZCoyote on April 25, 2012 at 11:47 AM

Yeah but what has he done for them lately? :0

Seriously, the unions aren’t exactly able to contribute the way they have in the past. Don’t forget that thanks to the Obama economy there are far fewer union members than there were four years ago- except of course for public sector employees which seem to have the survivability skills one would expect from any cockroach. You also have a few states that have managed to get themselves out of the business of collecting dues for the unions and it gets a bit awkward having to actually ask the member for their dues when you are just going to blow it on a GSA-style convention for a bunch of Dem Party fat cats. And finally, there is all that money the unions have already spent on recall drives, protest rallies, and the bankrolling of OWS.

Can you imagine the outcry if the GOP convention was paid for by Walmart? Why is this more acceptable?

WitchDoctor on April 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Of course, the left hates Wal-Mart because they are not unionized. Funny how you still see loads of bumper stickers for Obama in the parking lot. I guess principles are trumped by everyday low prices. Nevertheless, having the Koch Brothers underwrite the convention would be about the only thing that would be worse as far as the left is concerned.

Personally I have no problem with free market captialism. If it were me, I’d try to sell naming rights and have no problem with the Taco Bell Republican Convention or the Purina Dog Chow Democrat convention.

This year’s election will be rigged far beyond any election in our nation’s history.

fogw on April 25, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Yes, there is good reason why Van Jones and Color of Change are conducting a vendetta right now against ALEC (the non-partisan organization that tries to promote honest elections, among other things): they know Obama probably can’t win the election outright, so they’re doing everything possible to ensure that electoral fraud is as easy for the Obama campaign as possible.

Really, Ed? Didn’t most of the stimulus package go to preserving union jobs? Special bankruptcy protection for GM/Chrysler that resulted in bondholders and stockholders losing their stakes but union members keeping their jobs and owning much of the companies? All while destroying the businesses, livelihoods, and equity of dealership employees who are largely more conservative and non-union? NLRB decision that tied Boeing’s hands and prevented some degree of future profitability?

Who says he hasn’t delivered for them? The Unions themselves? That’s what all Democratic-voting constituency groups say–after all, that’s why they are Democratic-voting constituencies, because they think they are entitled to more favors than they have received.

Unions should be happy to pay for this convention–especially if they can “prove” business’ money is unnecessary while doing so.

President Barack Obama’s political advisers are pressing labor unions to contribute to the Democratic convention in September to cover a fundraising shortfall resulting from their self-imposed ban on corporate donations,

Please forgive me if this has been said before, but this distinction between unions and corporations smacks (to me) like some legalism determined by the same folks (politicians) who’ve gotten us to the brink of disaster. What’s the difference?

Kind of like Slick Willie: “It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.”

The Dems seldom use union labor for thier labor and when they do they pay slowly or stiff the bill. On the other hand the Repubs always use union labor and pay at the end of the week.
I worked the convention in Houston and our union did a 750 man hour rigging job in 350 man hours and were rewarded with the rest of the labor for the convention and our union was the only union to ever receive a letter of thank you from the Republican Party.
I think you would be surprised how many of our members vote for Republicans.